Alaina Woolfrey

The applicant father brought a Motion to Change a final order regarding child support after the parties' two children moved primarily into his care.

The respondent mother, who is self-employed, failed to pay child support, contribute to section 7 expenses, or provide required financial disclosure.

The court imputed the mother's income at $49,000 based on a vocational assessment and ordered her to pay retroactive and ongoing child support, as well as her proportionate share of section 7 expenses.

The court also ordered the mother to obtain life insurance to secure her support obligations, imposed a $2,000 penalty for her breach of disclosure orders, and awarded the father $14,000 in costs.

The respondent mother sought full indemnity costs following the applicant father's motion for parenting time and travel authorization, where the holiday parenting schedule issue was resolved at a settlement conference.

The father argued against costs, citing the settlement, or sought costs against the mother for unreasonable conduct.

The court found the father's conduct unreasonable, noting his repeated attempts to vary a recent interim order and his uncompromised settlement offer.

The mother's offer was found to be more favourable and compliant with Rule 18(4) of the Family Law Rules.

Despite the matter settling at a conference, the court awarded fixed costs to the mother, finding that the presumption against costs in such circumstances was overcome by the father's unreasonable conduct and the mother's reasonable offer.

The Applicant Father brought a motion seeking interim orders regarding parenting time, decision-making, and communication, and to strike portions of the Respondent Mother’s pleadings for failing to provide court-ordered disclosure.

The Mother filed a cross-motion addressing similar issues.

The court granted the Father increased parenting time, ordered the Mother to provide full consent for the child's developmental services, and compelled her to complete outstanding financial disclosure.

The Mother was also ordered to pay the Father's costs due to her non-compliance with disclosure orders.

The court declined to grant sole decision-making responsibility to either parent, leaving that issue for a future trial.